Discovery insure rejected vehicle fire claim.

If you are even thinking of insuring your vehicle with Discovery, do yourself a favour and read all the complaints on hellopeter and on Facebook. Discovery is the worst insurer when it comes to vehicle insurance and they will do everything in their power to look for reasons to reject your claim and that includes using money and resources to look for and creat reasons to reject your claim.

On the 23rd of July my vehicle caught on fire driving down the highway. I was traveling at around 100km/h in the slow lane with cruise control, i began to catch up to much slower traffic which must have been doing around 80km/h so I moved over into the fast lane and gradually passed the slower traffic reaching speeds of about 115km/h. As i passed and merged back into the slow lane my vehicle began to jerk and made a loud clunking sound with warming lights illuminated on the instrument cluster. I looked in my rear view mirror and saw a cloud of smoke behind me with oil spilled on the road. I immediately pulled into the emergency lane with my hazards on and got out of the vehicle to inspect the problem. Before I could open my bonnet I notice a thick cloud of white smoking coming out from the front grill and engine area and I immediately told my girlfriend to get out the car for safety. We quickly walked away from the vehicle and it caught on fire and began to burn from the front to the back.

Discovery insure rejected my vehicle fire claim based on accusations that some where during the course of my insurance cover i had fitted a aftermarket exhaust, which is not true as I have stated on numerous occasions that the vehicle has never had any physical changes done to it since my ownership of the vehicle.

They further state that the vehicle had to have had software modifications to override the ECU (computer box) in order to prevent engine warning lights based on the aftermarket exhaust piece that was on the vehicle which they can not prove that there was software modifications since the computer box was burned in the fire. Might I add that after contacting numerous vehicle workshops as well as vehicle performance shops I learned that you do not infact need software to override the computer system when there is a downpipe fitted to a vehicle. The workshops further informed me that by simply installing a small mini catalytic converter on the aftermarket exhaust allows the vehicle to function normally without the need for software. I was informed by Discovery that the exhaust was fitted with a catfooler which is infact a mini catalytic converter that is used on an aftermarket exhaust without the need for software modifications.

Discovery is making assumptions that i modified my vehicle while still having my warranty in place which is not allowed by the dealer or vehicle warranty provider as they will void your warranty cover and that the exhaust was changed during my ownership of the vehicle yet they have no proof of this being the case either.

I bought the vehicle in June 2020 at a private dealer and have never made any mechanical changes whatsoever to the vehicle. I am not a mechanic and i do not have a mechanical Inclination to fiddle with an engine or to determine what should be in a vehicle engine bay and what should not.

How many clients will be hit with this disgusting tactic by discovery? Not everyone knows what to look for when buying a vehicle, how many people have bought vehicles unaware of the changes made to the vehicle. How many Discivery clients are driving around in second hand vehicles that have mechanical changes made to them and are unaware of this, is Discovery going to take advantage of unsuspecting clients and reject their claims too? This is so wrong on so many levels. It is sneaky tactics and quite frankly disgusting to say the least!

If I buy a house and the roof collapses 3 months down the line due to flawed architecture how am I to know the roof was built poorly. I am not an architect and I would never be able to identify that the roof has a problem. Does this give my insurer the right to reject my roof claim based on the fact that I did not identify that the roof had been constructed poorly from the inside?

If this is how Discovery will operate then they should do an inspection on client vehicles before insuring them. If they had done an inspection on my vehicle on commencement of my insurance cover this would have proven that the vehicle exhaust on my car on commencement of cover is the exact same one which was in the photos from the fire and that nothing had been changed on my vehicle.

Furthermore they say that the fire was caused by a mechanical failure which they do not cover mechanical failures. I am not claiming for a mechanical failure I am claiming for a DAMN FIRE!!! Bear in mind I have full comprehensive cover which covers fires floods and accidents. On my fire cover they do not mention fire exclusions in their wording, there are no express terms to distinguish which fires they cover and which fires they do not cover, it explicitly says they cover Fires. Now they are coming back and saying they will not cover THIS fire in particular because it was caused by a mechanical failure.

Again there are no express terms in my policy relating to fires, now suddenly they have just decided they will apply a non existent express term in my insurance policy.

Discovery then questioned a VW technician who did a turbo replacement on my vehicle more than 7 months ago asking him if my exhaust was the same as the one in the photos of the fire or not. Bear in mind they are asking somebody who works on more than 5 vehicles a day to try and remember how my exhaust looked 7 months ago.

It became evident at this point that Discovery was in no way interested in protecting me as a client and consumer of their products and services when they sent 2 specialists to go and inspect my vehicle for non existent modifications. They even went as far as removing the turbo from my burnt vehicle and sending it to a VW dealer for inspection to determine if it is a modified/ enhanced performance turbo. By the grace of God the VW who inspected the turbo confirmed that it was a normal size turbo which is designed specifically for my vehicle model. Discovery was on a witch hunt to find non existent modifications just so they can have a reason to reject my claim.

I made 2 warranty claims on my VW warranty, once for the gear lever switch and and second time for the entire gear mechanism and both times my vehicle computer box was scanned by VW in order to check for faults and software and approve or reject my claim based on their findings and both times my claims were approved because my vehicle DID NOT HAVE SOFTWARE MODIFICATIONS!!!

Discovery insure has been diligent and precise when debiting my Nedbank account for my vehicle insurance, life cover and medical aid every single month and now when it is time to do what they are supposed to do they turn around and reject my claim. To add insult to injury they have debited my account for vehicle insurance on a claim they rejected for a vehicle that is burned to the ground. I have reversed that debit order because how dare they. What exactly are they insuring/ covering?

If you take a step back and openly look at this you can see that Discovery will use any reason to reject a claim. The core foundation of Discovery rejecting my claim is all about the exhaust system that i knew nothing about and nothing else. They have been obsessed about that exhaust since the first inspection of my vehicle. Specialists revisited my vehicle more than 3 times which shows just how dedicated Discovery was on rejecting the claim.

My broker tried to escalate the matter with Discovery and they told him they are not interested and that I am welcome to contact the Ombudsman.

Disgusting attitude to a client who has his medical aid, life cover and vehicle insurance with them.

I have contacted the Ombudsman for Short-term Insurance!

Do yourself a favour and do not insure your vehicle with Discovery insure the complaints on the Internet and Facebook speak for themselves!